ArticleBMC medical research methodology2020
A modified Delphi study to identify the features of high quality measurement plans for healthcare improvement projects.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
50 citing papers in PubMed.
- From quality indicator to quality measurement: design and implementation of an automated audit and feedback tool for chronic kidney disease in Belgian primary care.BMJ health & care informatics · 2026Article
- Article
- Maturity assessment of KenyaEMR: advancing digital health solutions through continuous improvement in Kenya.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Indicators for palliative care integration in primary health care: how expert profile shapes consensus in a modified Delphi study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Clinical pharmacology and prescribing education: An updated medical school curriculum from the British Pharmacological Society.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Article
- International consensus on school health literacy responsiveness: findings from a modified Delphi process.Health promotion international · 2026Article
- Using a Modified Delphi Process to Develop an Intervention to Support Care Coordination of Patient Social Needs in Primary Care.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
- Establishing criteria for emergency department-based episode of care definitions: a modified Delphi study.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Transforming vacant rural school buildings into age-friendly facilities under China's aging and low-fertility context: a natural language processing-based evaluation framework.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Article
- Development of entrustable professional activities for dental educators: a modified Delphi study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Integrating equity into hospital incident reporting and patient concerns systems: study protocol for a mixed methods study.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Article
- Priority setting for improved leukemia management and research in South Africa: a modified Delphi study.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Article
- Developing a Prototype Home-Based Toothbrushing Support Tool for Families in Scotland: A Mixed-Methods Study With Modified Delphi Survey and Semi-Structured Interviews.Community dentistry and oral epidemiology · 2025Article
- Challenges and opportunities for AMR research in the ASEAN following the One Health approach.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025Article
- Core outcomes for the evaluation of new healthcare programmes - a modified Delphi study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Among at Risk Populations: Protocol for Distributional Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Priority indicators for evaluating the impact of field epidemiology training programs - results of a global modified Delphi study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Co-developing a comprehensive disease policy model with stakeholders: The case of malaria during pregnancy.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe design and execution of measurement in quality improvement (QI) initiatives is often poor. Better guidance on "what good looks like" might help to mitigate some of the problems. We report a consensus-building process that sought to identify which features are important to include in QI measurement plans.
methodsWe conducted a three-stage consensus-building approach: (1) identifying the list of features of measurement plans that were potential candidates for inclusion based on literature review and the study team's experience; (2) a two-round modified Delphi exercise with a panel of experts to establish consensus on the importance of these features; and (3) a small in-person consensus group meeting to finalise the list of features.
resultsA list of 104 candidate questions was generated. A panel of 19 experts in the Delphi reviewed these questions and produced consensus on retaining 46 questions in the first round and on a further 22 in the second round. Thematic analysis of open text responses from the panellists suggested a number of areas of debate that were explicitly considered by the consensus group. The exercise yielded 74 questions (71% of 104) on which there was consensus in five categories of measurement relating to: design, data collection and management, analysis, action, and embedding.
conclusionsThis study offers a consensus-based view on the features of a good measurement plan for a QI project in healthcare. The results may be of use to QI teams, funders and evaluators, but are likely to require further development and testing to ensure feasibility and usefulness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.